On 2010-05-09 16:59 +0100, Nick Dokos wrote: > I disagree: they are not parenthesis movement bindings - they are > structure-navigation bindings. For example, C-M-f is forward-sexp. > In lisp, an sexp has some relationship to parentheses, but it is > incidental; in other programming modes, an sexp is whatever makes > sense in that language and these commands are redefined appropriately.
Perhaps you haven't noticed. SEXP is a useful abstract. For example, it allows you to move across some_long_function_name in C and even in the message-mode I'm currently using, not just parenthesis. Situation like this will arise when editing org files too. It is a key binding that you can rely on in various modes and they happen to do the right thing. They are not re-defined, in most modes once you have a proper syntax table, they just work. On the other hand, the defun abstraction is not as universal as sexp so redefine them is fine. C-M-f and C-M-b are keys that I use extensively. I haven't used C-M-n and C-M-p much. > I think it is entirely appropriate to use these bindings to navigate > structure in org-mode as well. I am not against binding suitable keys to structure movement. Leo -- CCL-USER> _ _______________________________________________ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
